View Poll Results: Which is the better Seauel Trilogy film thus far?

Voters
73. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Force Awakens

    43 58.90%
  • The Last Jedi

    30 41.10%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 103
  1. #46
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Walton View Post
    I can see the confusion about Finn's sacrifice, but I think it's just a case of the film attempting to provide two different contexts, one in which sacrifice is noble and necessary and the other in which it's emotionally driven and impractical. The idea is that Finn's sacrifice won't change the outcome. That said, it's not entirely clear in the film that Finn's suicide run wouldn't actually make a difference. I'm not entirely sure it would even take the cannon out at this point, but even if he did, the Resistance is still stuck there with no way out until Poe finds the way out and Rey opens it for them.

    I do think TLJ works with more complex arguments than previous SW films, and maybe that's why the message is sometimes misunderstood. A lot of fans assume that Kylo Ren's "let the past die" is the film's philosophy, too. After all, isn't this the movie where Yoda encourages Luke to burn the sacred texts? Except...not exactly. Rey has the sacred texts with her and Yoda knew that when he said that everything she needs she already possesses. But that moment where you see the texts in the Falcon flashes by so quickly that many people miss it, especially on a first viewing.

    I think THE LAST JEDI knows exactly what it wants to be, but there's a risk involved when complex arguments are given room to breathe. And so much in the film depends on context and reading subtext. Rian Johnson doesn't spell things out as clearly as Lucas and Abrams, for better and for worse.
    I think TLJ is *trying* to have more complex arguments and themes than other Star Wars films, but has a poorer plot than its concepts require. Some of its ideas are undercut by its own writing, or run into issues with the good character work done in previous films, or simply isn't quite as original or groundbreaking for the Saga as the film supposes.

    For instance:

    - You're right about how Finn's run at the battering ram is supposed to be a different context than Holdo's hyperspace ram, but both have some issues that can throw off a more critical analysis. Not only was Finn's charge unclear in whether or not he'd succeed, but the dramatic message is betrayed by delaying the firing of the cannon until Rose kisses him, making it look like he could have reached the cannon, at least, and Rose's message is rendered meaningless when the film hasn't developed a righteous wrath in Finn so he'd be "fighting what he hates," and when his actions would have objectively saved lives that he loves at that moment. Meanwhile, Holdo's charge - while utterly beautiful - was the culmination of a plotline that painted the First Order and Resistance as lacking common sense in their military tactics and analyses, relied on writing Holdo as a Captain Queeg type character neither properly briefing her men nor maintaining control of her crew when challenged while *trying* to portray her as a reasonable authority figure at the end, and never explains why no one has used a such a disproportionately effective tactic as the hyperspace ram before.

    - You're also right about how Kylo Ren's line is in actual fact the opposite of what the film's trying to argue - because he's the villain and we've actually entered the "reconstruction" phase of the the film's Deconstruction-Recosntruction Fix. That's why Luke shows up to save the day; the point is supposed to be that he's come to realize how he's given into cynicism and made a mistake. But starting out by so radically ignoring Luke's altruistic history, "breaking" him just a *bit* too much and undermining the tragedy that's supposed to be at the center of it all by ignoring certain implications because they'd be inconvenient regarding Kylo? You're telling me that Luke not only became totally disenfranchised with the Jedi and apathetic about the rest of the Galaxy because he ignited the lightsaber over his burgeoning school-shooter of a nephew, but that I'm supposed to feel sympathy for Kylo when his next action was to murder dozens of other students and make a murder cult out of the rest, and that Luke's not going to express any real guilt over those other students who died ro express a pull towards acting as at least a medic in the Galaxy? Please!

    - Trying to use Rey Random and Broomboy to show that anyone can be a hero/Jedi is nothing new. Even the OT showed that anyone could be a Jedi, from the farmboy to the old hermit to the weird little creature in the swamp. And since the PT used the Chosen One archetype as something to deconstruct and render tragic by subversion, trying to effectively repeat it but straight this time means you *need* to focus on developing the character as a person... Not writing them in a sexist way, contorted around a villain you won't properly recontextualize for her while trying to inject "uncomfortable intimacy" when the villain has already violated the heroine's mind against her will via torture and maimed and murdered her friends. And the Everyman theme isn't just covered by previous Jedi protagonists, but by Finn in TFA, where he went from nameless and faceless henchman to hero. And eliminating any other challeneg to the character by botching the Rey Random reveal only exacerbates the accusations of her being an unbelievable and uninteresting character. TFA gave Johnson a lot of material to work with... And Johnson got enamored with messages instead of characters.

    - Evil war profiteers and exploitive businessmen? The Confederacy of Indenpendent Systems would like to have a word about I why that's laughably small potatoes compared to the PT. As would those slave kids you showed on Canto Bight when you had Finn and Rose free the animals and treat it like a victory... Even though those animals will be rounded up hours later and those slave kids are still slave kids. And ignoring Finn's history as a child slave soldier because you're uninterested in the character doesn't help either - nor does taking all your new, diverse cast members and sticking them all in a plotline where they make the situation worse because they won't listen to the white woman.

    - And finally, in regards to the general stakes of the film and audience investment, Rian Johnson unintentionally wrote a smaller, less complex Galaxy by ignoring even the little world building in TFA. If the Galaxy won't respond logically with wrath at Hosnian Prime and Starkiller Base's destruction... If the First Order is suddenly a bloated, blundering collection of idiots with infinite resources instead of the sleek evolution from TFA... Character archetype means more than character development... How can I say this film is an evolution over the OT and PT, plot wise?
    Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?

    I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP

  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by godisawesome View Post
    I think TLJ is *trying* to have more complex arguments and themes than other Star Wars films, but has a poorer plot than its concepts require. Some of its ideas are undercut by its own writing, or run into issues with the good character work done in previous films, or simply isn't quite as original or groundbreaking for the Saga as the film supposes.

    For instance:

    - You're right about how Finn's run at the battering ram is supposed to be a different context than Holdo's hyperspace ram, but both have some issues that can throw off a more critical analysis. Not only was Finn's charge unclear in whether or not he'd succeed, but the dramatic message is betrayed by delaying the firing of the cannon until Rose kisses him, making it look like he could have reached the cannon, at least, and Rose's message is rendered meaningless when the film hasn't developed a righteous wrath in Finn so he'd be "fighting what he hates," and when his actions would have objectively saved lives that he loves at that moment. Meanwhile, Holdo's charge - while utterly beautiful - was the culmination of a plotline that painted the First Order and Resistance as lacking common sense in their military tactics and analyses, relied on writing Holdo as a Captain Queeg type character neither properly briefing her men nor maintaining control of her crew when challenged while *trying* to portray her as a reasonable authority figure at the end, and never explains why no one has used a such a disproportionately effective tactic as the hyperspace ram before.

    - You're also right about how Kylo Ren's line is in actual fact the opposite of what the film's trying to argue - because he's the villain and we've actually entered the "reconstruction" phase of the the film's Deconstruction-Recosntruction Fix. That's why Luke shows up to save the day; the point is supposed to be that he's come to realize how he's given into cynicism and made a mistake. But starting out by so radically ignoring Luke's altruistic history, "breaking" him just a *bit* too much and undermining the tragedy that's supposed to be at the center of it all by ignoring certain implications because they'd be inconvenient regarding Kylo? You're telling me that Luke not only became totally disenfranchised with the Jedi and apathetic about the rest of the Galaxy because he ignited the lightsaber over his burgeoning school-shooter of a nephew, but that I'm supposed to feel sympathy for Kylo when his next action was to murder dozens of other students and make a murder cult out of the rest, and that Luke's not going to express any real guilt over those other students who died ro express a pull towards acting as at least a medic in the Galaxy? Please!

    - Trying to use Rey Random and Broomboy to show that anyone can be a hero/Jedi is nothing new. Even the OT showed that anyone could be a Jedi, from the farmboy to the old hermit to the weird little creature in the swamp. And since the PT used the Chosen One archetype as something to deconstruct and render tragic by subversion, trying to effectively repeat it but straight this time means you *need* to focus on developing the character as a person... Not writing them in a sexist way, contorted around a villain you won't properly recontextualize for her while trying to inject "uncomfortable intimacy" when the villain has already violated the heroine's mind against her will via torture and maimed and murdered her friends. And the Everyman theme isn't just covered by previous Jedi protagonists, but by Finn in TFA, where he went from nameless and faceless henchman to hero. And eliminating any other challeneg to the character by botching the Rey Random reveal only exacerbates the accusations of her being an unbelievable and uninteresting character. TFA gave Johnson a lot of material to work with... And Johnson got enamored with messages instead of characters.

    - Evil war profiteers and exploitive businessmen? The Confederacy of Indenpendent Systems would like to have a word about I why that's laughably small potatoes compared to the PT. As would those slave kids you showed on Canto Bight when you had Finn and Rose free the animals and treat it like a victory... Even though those animals will be rounded up hours later and those slave kids are still slave kids. And ignoring Finn's history as a child slave soldier because you're uninterested in the character doesn't help either - nor does taking all your new, diverse cast members and sticking them all in a plotline where they make the situation worse because they won't listen to the white woman.

    - And finally, in regards to the general stakes of the film and audience investment, Rian Johnson unintentionally wrote a smaller, less complex Galaxy by ignoring even the little world building in TFA. If the Galaxy won't respond logically with wrath at Hosnian Prime and Starkiller Base's destruction... If the First Order is suddenly a bloated, blundering collection of idiots with infinite resources instead of the sleek evolution from TFA... Character archetype means more than character development... How can I say this film is an evolution over the OT and PT, plot wise?
    I think you hit the nail on the head. Finn never show's any true hatred of the First Order. He shows at most minor annoyance and an understandable mix of fear and courage. It focuses so much on deconstruction and subversion that the reconstruction is not up to task.

  3. #48
    Mighty Member Darkseid Is's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerz79 View Post
    I don't find either too great but I walked out of Force Awakens wanting to spend more time with the characters it introduced and never wanted to see the characters The Last Jedi introduced ever again so I give the upper hand to Force Awakens.
    This is how I feel.

    I didn't like the Luke stuff but once Kylo kills snoke and Rey gets the lightsaber, I was ready for some exiting stuff to happen. Stuff I wouldn't expect to happen and I was okay with the Luke stuff if this was going to be something new. But it just goes back to Kylo bad, Rey good. I know that's how it should be but they made it seem like it would be a whole new thing you wouldn't expect. Oh well.

  4. #49
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    It's the same thing as a Marvel film vs a DC film.

    TFA was very much a check all boxes, don't do anything controversial, please the crowd, and be very safe.

    TLJ was more willing to take risks with the material and push the audience places they weren't comfortable with, some of the pacing was off, and 99% of your enjoyment depended on how well the risks paid off to you. So some people hated it and some people loved it. It's divisive.

  5. #50
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    The prequels have by far the more interesting story to tell, but it botched it in way too many places. The cast is hit-and-miss. McGregor? Fantastic. McDiarmid? Fantastic. Neeson was great, and as always Frank Oz was a delight as Yoda. Sadly Anakin was miscast twice. Portman phoned in her performance. And cnsidering that Anakin IS the story and Padme was key, those are major, major blunders. Beyond that the problems were far more than editing. The main issue is that Lucas refused work within the already small framework that the OT provided for the past. He instead chose to rewrite key facts from the originals to suit the prequels instead of the other way around, harming the sense and integrity of the history.
    Portman didn't phone in her performance. Her character just sucked and was very dry. In the first film she was written to be a very androgynous queen and unassuming to maintain the secret. In the second film she was written to be the standoffish prude who wouldn't give into her feelings until the end, so you were devoid of emotional moments. By the third the character was supposed to be less reserved and not holding back anymore, but there was never a character established prior to that. She did fine in the scenes she needed (confronting Anakin and her death scene). I really wish they went with that rumor where Padme was very privvy to the Palpatine's plot and that Anakin was turning so she was actually organizing the rebellion behind his back. That would have at least given the character something.

    Lloyd was fine for being a child. a 10 year old Anakin isn't going to be interesting. He's supposed to be a kid. Hayden really depends on what you wanted out of Vader. Alot of people had issues with Vader being angsty and having issues with attachment and loss. But tbh that's a very valid way of someone getting off course and going the wrong way. It's just people wanted Vader to be cooler.

    Prequels do have the FAR better story though. If you gave someone a synopsis of all 3 trilogies the prequels are easily more compelling. The big thing too is that in many ways Star Wars it's own film and then Empire and Return of the Jedi are sort of a part one and part 2. And TFA is so very different from TLJ that it also disrupts the plot.

  6. #51
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,725

    Default

    To each their own, but I only blame so much on direction and the character they were given. Everyone was directed the same but you had guys like Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid that made the absolute best of what they had and turned in some great stuff. Padme sucked for more reasons than just a poorly crafted character. Her performance was sub-par, imo. Same as Christensen. As for Lloyd, I don't blame him for his acting, like you said he's just a kid, but when I say he's miscast I say that because Anakin shouldn't have been 9 years old to start the franchise in the first place. He should have been around 14 or so, same ages as Padme, so he could be played by the same actor in all three films. The only reason he was made that young in the first movie was to reiterate the dependency on his mother, and that was a wholly unnecessary move. They could have displayed just as meaningful a connection to his mother even if he was a little older.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

  7. #52
    Ultimate Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    I think both TFA and TLJ have been some of the best movies in the series to date. However, I think I'd rate TFA over TLJ; I find the story a little more engaging.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  8. #53
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    To each their own, but I only blame so much on direction and the character they were given. Everyone was directed the same but you had guys like Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid that made the absolute best of what they had and turned in some great stuff. Padme sucked for more reasons than just a poorly crafted character. Her performance was sub-par, imo. Same as Christensen. As for Lloyd, I don't blame him for his acting, like you said he's just a kid, but when I say he's miscast I say that because Anakin shouldn't have been 9 years old to start the franchise in the first place. He should have been around 14 or so, same ages as Padme, so he could be played by the same actor in all three films. The only reason he was made that young in the first movie was to reiterate the dependency on his mother, and that was a wholly unnecessary move. They could have displayed just as meaningful a connection to his mother even if he was a little older.
    I'm just really struggling to see a scene or moment where you could swap Portman out for some world renowned actress and get a whole lot better. Like marginally better, sure? But making the character as a whole and the part significantly improved.... not really.

  9. #54
    Astonishing Member David Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    I think both TFA and TLJ have been some of the best movies in the series to date. However, I think I'd rate TFA over TLJ; I find the story a little more engaging.
    I think TFA lends itself to countless viewings, while you almost have to be in a certain mindset to fully appreciate TLJ.

    TFA works better as an adventure, whereas TLJ covers the philosophical side of things in more depth. But that means TLJ feels a bit slower getting to its big moment. I think Luke's final scene might rank higher by itself than the film as a whole in audience's minds. Just like fans tend to rank ESB higher than ROTJ as a whole, but the Battle of Endor/Death Star dogfight/Throne Room duel is seen more favorably than that ranking might suggest.

  10. #55
    Ultimate Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Walton View Post
    I think TFA lends itself to countless viewings, while you almost have to be in a certain mindset to fully appreciate TLJ.

    TFA works better as an adventure, whereas TLJ covers the philosophical side of things in more depth. But that means TLJ feels a bit slower getting to its big moment. I think Luke's final scene might rank higher by itself than the film as a whole in audience's minds. Just like fans tend to rank ESB higher than ROTJ as a whole, but the Battle of Endor/Death Star dogfight/Throne Room duel is seen more favorably than that ranking might suggest.
    Interesting way of looking at it.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  11. #56
    Pro Mutant Anarchist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,683

    Default

    While Last Jedi was by no means perfect, it was still better than that lazy, soulless carbon copy of a New Hope.
    Last edited by Anarchist; 06-05-2018 at 09:14 AM.

  12. #57
    Astonishing Member David Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    Interesting way of looking at it.
    I don't even have a favorite. I like them both for very different reasons.

    I don't think TFA is a carbon copy of ANH by any stretch of the imagination, but tonally it's similar. It feels like a grand swashbuckling adventure with space pirates and wizards. I enjoy them both on that level.

    TLJ is more difficult to take in. And to a certain extent, it can't be fully taken in until Episode IX. People tend to forget just how ambivalent fans felt about ESB until ROTJ!

    TFA is more impressive as visual spectacle, but TLJ has richer visuals (by which I mean images that convey subtext). And again, I like both approaches!

  13. #58

    Default

    I think one of the reasons people act with such virtroil hatred is because of the deconstruction. Particularly when it comes too Luke. I think that's the biggest factor here. Though what they think of the other arcs also play a part but Luke's is the big one.

  14. #59
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,472

    Default

    When it comes to the acting in the prequels, a lot of it comes down to how interested Lucas was in certain scenes. The man has always been more interested in the editing/visual aspects of filmmaking than the other parts, including the acting. So his dialogue followed suite. Scenes that advance the plot he wants to tell have more thought and effort put into them, like the massive lore-dump that was the opera scene, while romance scenes are just something that has to be there to make sure Luke and Leia come along, but have little thought or effort put into them. That's why McDiarmid shined in Sith while other actors floundered. His material was what Lucas was actually enthusiastic about. No one could make the 'because I'm so in love with you' scene work.

  15. #60
    Astonishing Member David Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MASTER-OF-SUPRISE View Post
    I think one of the reasons people act with such virtroil hatred is because of the deconstruction. Particularly when it comes too Luke. I think that's the biggest factor here. Though what they think of the other arcs also play a part but Luke's is the big one.
    Agreed. To be honest, as much as I love TLJ, I still have conflicted feelings about the direction they took Luke. And I feel like if Lucasfilm could go back in time, they'd take a less divisive approach. Because no matter how one feels about TLJ, it's hard to deny that it damaged Star Wars' 'big tent' franchise appeal. There are fans of the OT that feel like they've been disregarded. That's not the best path forward.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •